Friday, December 31, 2010

Happy New Year!!!

Together we can put an end to the ridiculous "No Kill" movement by continuing to supply the truth.

Wishing you and your furry friends"Happy New Year" and an end to Nathan Winograd's lies and deceit. Let's all lift a glass to the end of his "No Kill Nation" and a prayer for the reality of spay/neuter stopping all this madness.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

The World is Coming to an End!!!!!!

Occasionally I drop in on the Whino's blog and was shocked today to see this in his "Happy Holidays" post.

"Together, we will put an end to overpopulation… of ineffective shelter directors mired in the failed philosophies of the past."

What??? Do my ears and eyes deceive me or has the Whino just admitted there is an overpopulation?? Is the world coming to an end and he wants to make peace with his maker?

Hey, Whino, according to everything you have preached before, there is no overpopulation. What has changed your take on it? Couldn't be the increase in impounds or euthanasia while all along you are insisting there are plenty of homes? Couldn't be because many are now finding you to be too radical to listen to anymore? Sounds like you are dancing to a different tune now.

UPDATE: Oops. Looks like he means ending ineffective shelter directors, not the PET overpopulation. Just wishful thinking on my part. So he still wants to end anything but the pet overpopulation problem. He and Brent Toellner, two people in complete and total denial, not to mention out of touch with reality. Oh well.

KCDogPoop Stinking It Up Again!! Part 2

I came across this article this morning and found it interesting because KCDogPoop is really spending all his time commenting on it.

Seems Mariel's pitbull was randomly attacking people and pets. Where was the provocation for that attack? Toellner put a list of reasons for pit attacks on the above article and I would like to ask him where this one falls.

And the stupid bitch actually wants this pit back. She's a slow learner it looks like, just hope she has lots of insurance.

Brent Toellner has no shame. He doesn't realize that is because of him and others like him that their beloved pits are being euthanized in record numbers or that they are setting the record for fatalities. He is one disgusting human being.

Monday, December 27, 2010

Are the Rescues Behind Brenda Barnette?

UPDATE: This is really sad but this is what happens when the public hears "No Kill".
One would assume that if the rescue community were in support of Brenda Barnette that they would come running to take all those animals out of the shelters and make her look good. Let's take a closer look at the first five months of Brenda Barnette's tenur with the City of Los Angeles.

My previous post has some numbers that BB released right before Xmas although the total stats have not been posted on the website as of the writing of this post.

To first address the question of the support of the rescue community, looks like the answer is no. In July, New Hope Placements were 676, August 616, September 614, October 577, and November 397!! What happened? Doesn't Barnette's philosophy of "No Kill" stress it takes a community? Where's the community here? Instead of promoting a relationship with this community, Barnette is instead promoting her relationship with the breeding community with her push for upping the pet household limits. The rescue community sees this and is withdrawing their support in the only way that will be recognized, don't take the animals from the shelters.

In October the return to owner was 434 but the bottom fell out in November with only 292 pets reclaimed. Easy to abandon pets when you think in terms of "No Kill". The intakes are the highest since 05 with the "No Kill'ers" yelling it is the result of MSN. No it is the result of a lack of reality based leadership.

How LA could have hired Barnette with her baggage is beyond me. She is chasing her breeder friends around because she's not stupid. She knows they make political contributions and she is an appointee of the political system. She can ride the waves behind her boss if she brings in the moola. Why isn't she concentrating on things she can make happen like shoring up licensing? Or doing something to get more pets back to their owners like microchipping, etc. Why isn't she helping the rescue community to have exempts for their fosters rather than chasing the raising of pet limits? Because it has nothing to do with helping the shelter animals.

She's doing a lousy job, people, and she has nothing in her bag of tricks that will make anything good happen.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Fudging Doesn't Change the Truth, BB

Seems BB did a press release today praising herself to high heaven. The stats for November still aren't on the website but this press release seems to paint a rosy picture, but not when you compare to the last stats posted for October.

2,105 Companion Animals Went Home in December
(now, does that include the November stats?) Before the Holidays
Thanks to you, this December 2,105 companion animals
(or does it mean in ONE day she had this many? See how she is trying to confuse.) from Los Angeles City shelters are in homes of their own.

“We are grateful to 1,264 adopters
(compared to 1844 for Oct. 10 for just cats and dogs) , our fabulous New Hope rescue partners who took 397 deserving animals from our shelters (compared to 624 New Hope Placements of cats and dogs in Oct. 10), our dedicated partners who transferred 152 dogs to communities where adopters were waiting to meet them (and were these already altered by the LA Taxpayer with any kind of reimbursement from those "communities"?) and 292 caring families (compared to 492 for cats and dogs in Oct. 10)
who came to our shelters to be reunited with their pets who had gotten lost”, reported Brenda Barnette, General Manager, Los Angeles Animal Services.

Los Angeles City Shelters will be open December 24th and December 26th. If you are spending some quality time at home during this Holiday Season, this could just be the puurrrrfect time to add a furry family member to your life!
(yeah, just the right setting to bring in a new pet, chaos, people, yelling, running, children, you name it, great time to acclimate a new pet!!)If you have room (or a garage or a bathroom) in your heart and home to add a new best friend, please visit one of our six locations and choose to adopt!


Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Brenda Barnette-Your Desperation is Showing!! & More "Hot" Stuff From LA

Well, folks, I had to take a little break but I’m back and rarin’ to share, so here goes.

Has anybody noticed that BB is sending out "News Releases" every few days,begging people to adopt, foster....anything,( just please get these animal out because my stats are in the toilet!!) Well, that's certainly the way it's looking.

She is in waaaay over her head. People aren't rushing in to get those ten year old pit bulls and the word’s out that the LAAS shelters are getting overcrowded. Today she sent a big news item entitled "The Weather Outside is Frightening" and I thought, wow, she's actually telling people to get their pets out of the torrential rain--but NO--it was telling you to adopt a cat for Christmas. (Holidays, with all the parties, strangers and chaos are a perfect time to bring in a new pet, she says.)

Here’s the string of “Desperation messages” she’s put out just this month—all saying about the same thing. Does she think this is PR? You can see them on I’d say she’s getting close to panic and some others think so too and have e-mailed me. What do you think? Maybe her best buddies (besides breeders) Ed Muzika and the ADL-LA can give us a little inside scoop on their idol. Is she already falling apart? Why aren’t they singing her praises for Christmas. Has she toppled off her pedestal?

Adopt a Cat Holiday Promotion - December 20, 2010

Adoption Discount Days for December - December 16, 2010

Holidy Shoping for Pet Lovers - December 13, 2010

Holiday Pet Safety Guide - December 10, 2010

Home Before the Holidays - December 8, 2010

Talk around town is also that no enforcement is being done on breeders (why doesn’t that surprise us?) or anything else. Of course, what do you expect when you hire a Field Operations Director with no field operations management experience? Yes, folks , Brenda Barnette bypassed LAAS officers with lots of experience to hire, Mark Salazar, someone she can bully and who wouldn’t know what she’s REALLY doing. (More on that later.)

You can’t make this stuff up, folks! Miss BB is right back at it again, making it up as she goes along. But it looks like LA may be smarter than (she thinks) she is.

A biggie is the the motion to increase household pet limits in LA City was assigned to Planning, according to the file. This is rational. They’ll be looking at facts and what it does to people and animals to jam them into small houses and yards in a city like LA that’s already overpopulated with people and animals. It will also bring in the opinions of people who have millions of dollars invested in L.A. real estate and may not like turning their entire neighborhood or the whole city into an overcrowded animal shelter so that Brenda Barnette and her buddies Rosendahl and Koretz can pay a favor back to their supporters in the breeding industry.

Here’s another one BB thought she could pull off but got exposed. This is a biggie! Read this---do you think any veterinarian in the SCVMA is going to risk looking like a fool by using Ms.B’s name again?

Barnette claimed and wrote in her report to the LAAS Commission for their October 12 meeting that the Southern California Veterinary Medical Association and all its 1,500 members are in support of raising the limits in LA to five dogs AND five cats. There seems to have been a “slight misunderstanding” according to an anonymous e-mail I received that had a copy of the SCVMA Nov. PULSE magazine article attached. It seems that only 55% of the SCVMA members who responded to the survey think it is OK to increase the number of TOTAL pets in households in Los Angeles to FIVE.

Seems during that official meeting BB had with four of the top vets of the organization (including John Hamil, a Laguna Beach dog breeder/vet who even made TV commercials for Pedigree with his dogs. See the link below for his take on SB 250—the CA S/N Bill and on an AKC panel), Ms. Barnette forgot one small detail. Some of the best veterinary minds in Los Angeles were not told or didn’t grasp that Los Angeles already allows three dogs and three cats, totaling six, and that BB, Rosie and PK want that to go up to TEN. I’ll bet the head of the SCVMA was not happy at being embarrassed and misquoted by BB! Get used to it LA. It’s all about HER so don’t get your panties in a bunch if she “fudges” a little, here and there—it’s for her cause—the BREEDERS and the AKC!!

And, speaking of veterinarians who breed…I couldn’t resist searching for Bill Rosendahl’s WLA
veterinary friend who supposedly started the whole increased-limits thing and I looked around until I found a vet that had a post called, “Looking for Love.” Voila! It was him, but OMG—the next episode of StoryTime with Dr.B. is called “Hot Fessie.” It’s too X-rated for this blog, but there it was—written by the vet who wants more animals in Los Angeles and describing his female dog’s heat in graphic detail! Get ready to feel a little sick if you are a rescuer and think these people are your friends! You can just Google that name for yourself. Like I said, folks, you can’t make this stuff up!

Here’s another example of this depraved crowd.

Take a look at the "Stud Service Agreement" of Barnette’s best breeder buddy, Cathie Turner, who is President of the breeding organization that sued against the L.A. S/N Ordiinance, (CDOC). It says she'll impregnate your "bitch" anyway you want it--natural methods (as long as her stud can provide the necessary service). She'll do it by artificial insemination, so your "bitch" doesn't have a choice. Or she offers "frozen sperm"---in case things don't "warm up" enough for the real thing! Can you imagine her and Barnette (who is/was a breeder) enjoying these activities on Christmas morning? Or maybe that's what they do at their holiday parties--everybody has a few drinks and stands around and watches the live doggie porn! (Oh, almost forgot, it was also reported that Cathie Turner says she doesn’t have an LA breeder permit because she doesn’t breed in the city. Where in her detailed contract does it say she can take that bitch to another location? Somebody should check and see if BB made sure there is a breeders’ permit for CT and her Sunbeam Farm Golden Retrievers.)

Question: Has it occurred to anybody else that “breeding a bitch” the way the Sunbeam Farm Kennel Contract describes it, is literally “rape.” The female has NO choice. They choose the stud and she gets pregnant or else they do it again till she does. Is there anything more unnatural than a female (of any species) not getting to choose who she wants to mate with? The natural way of any species is that the female does chose her mate, she choses the most healthy, the strongest, etc. Is this any different from the "rape rack" used by the pit bull nutters? Why isn't this considered cruelty?

But when she puts on her Sunday-go-to-meeting suit, Cathie Turner is after the goodwill of the Animal Services Commission by dangling "sponsorship" of shelters by breeders and breed clubs. So while the breeders in the club rake in thousands from their puppies, they will provide a stack of old newspapers and used blankets for the shelter animals? What a deal!.

How about proving they are paying their fair share of taxes and not lying on how many litters and puppies per litter they are having and selling? What a deal for them and what an insult to the Commission and to the animals and overflow being killed in the shelters who are the second, third, fourth generation from their purebreds (it only takes a couple of years, folks) of the "purebreds" the breeders sell all over the city for big bucks. But, of course, those are not show champions so what do they care.

What matters to breeders is exactly what BB is giving them--or trying to give them: NO LIMITS, NO S/ N LAW (Cathie Turner already said she may refile against it), NO REAL LICENSING (on-line only so the breeders won't be bothered by some pesky canvasser or officer knocking on their door and seeing all their crated bitches and studs--remember, the puppies don't "count" so they don’t have to hide them.)

Where's the ADL-LA and Muzika and all the others that pummeled Boks like a woman with a scarlet letter??? Barnette admitted that the impounds went up after she came. Where are the stats on her "foster" program? Boks was FORCED to disclose EVERYTHING immediately. Why isn't anybody even asking? Have they realized Barnette came here for only one purpose--to make Los Angeles the BREEDING CAPITAL CITY of the nation? Worse, yet, are the ADL-LA and Ed Muzika accepting it or ARE THEY PART OF IT??? Maybe so…they all follow the Whino around like whimpering puppies, hanging on the words “No Kill” like they are saving their own lives and Nathan Winograd, he has already proven to be in bed with the breeders. Do we need a calculator to figure this one out?

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Nathan Winograd Doesn't Care About Animals

We'll start all these posts off with a bang. Nathan J. Winograd, protector of breeders, has been exposed, as if he hasn't been already. While with Tompkins County, the Whiney actually protected a breeder, delaying this breeder's charges of cruelty.
""In February 2003, the Groton kennel relinquished 59 dogs to Tompkins County SPCA. The SPCA maintained there were signs of neglect and long-term medical problems. Records showed that the kennel had never been cited for conditions in the nine years it had operated. The SPCA, the American Kennel Club and the State of New York had all inspected the kennel. After an initial license inspection, the New York Dept. of Agriculture and Markets contacted Mr. Winograd to inform him of the conditions in the Groton kennel. Winograd admitted he had known about the Groton kennel conditions since he began as director of Tompkins County SPCA. His goal was to “gradually” reduce the number of animals at the kennel. An Ithaca Journal op ed at the time argued that Winograd and the SPCA dropped the ball on the abusive kennel by failing to follow through with appropriate action.

Since the SPCA routinely facilitates the prosecution of animal abuse, it is puzzling that this organization recently went out of its way to claim serious incidents of neglect at a dog breeding facility without following through with charges. In other instances of alleged violations of state animal welfare laws, the SPCA quickly handed the cases over to law enforcement authorities for prosecution. Why not now?""

What in the hell does Winograd mean, gradually reduce the number of animals at the kennel? I'll tell you what it means, animals were left to suffer while the Whiney was bragging to the world he has discovered how to stop euthanasia. See how this man thinks!!! You don't play around with a cruelty case, you take the animals and run. Not Winograd, oh no, he didn't give a damn about those animals, he only cared about his numbers and how it would affect those.

And least we forget how Winograd walked away from "cruelty" during his consultations only to refer to it on paper. He didn't point these things out to staff, just allowed them to continue, leaving the animals to suffer so he could use it in his reports. And where is he with those horrible shelters he speaks of on his website? What's he doing to stop these shelters? Anything other than lip service, does he go there and organize protests or whatever, anything? These are not the actions of anyone who truly cares about animals.

The "man", and I use that term loosely, doesn't care about animals and the more than comes out shows this plainly. Listening, ADL-LA?? Stay tuned, more to come on the Whiney's and his loonie tunes followers to come on this station.

Pat Dunaway


Almost too much and will be more than one post. You just can't make this stuff up, folks, unbelievable.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Stupidity Follows Nathan Winograd the Loser

Here's another article on the subject. I originally took it down because it contained too much info but since IndyBay doesn't want to take it down, I'll post it too.

The City of Los Angeles was sued by six environment groups because the City was doing TNR (trap, neuter, return of cats to outdoor colonies) without first doing the necessary environmental review. The City lost the case. After the City lost Nathan tried to intervene. Nathan lost his motion to intervene because he didn't file timely. He appealed that decision and just lost again for the same reason. What's it called when you do the same thing over and over again expecting different results? Insanity. In June 2008 The Urban Wildlands Group, Endangered Habitats League, Los Angeles Audubon Society, Palos Verdes/South Bay Audubon Society, Santa Monica Bay Audubon Society, and American Bird Conservancy sued the City of Los Angeles. They sued the City to stop them from continuing to implement TNR colonies without first doing the necessary environment reviews. Though the City denied they were implementing TNR, evidence showed and the court ruled that they had been operating such a program. In January 2010 the court issued a final judgment and an injunction prohibiting the City from operating a TNR program without first doing the necessary review.

Two months after the City lost the case Nathan Winograd, through his No Kill Advocacy Center, and Stray Cat Alliance filed an ex parte motion to intervene. The court denied the motion as untimely. These motions should be filed before a judgment is entered. Even though Nathan et al. knew about this case since the inception, he did not intervene earlier. In court documents they falsely stated they only heard about the lawsuit after the City lost. Even then they still did not file timely.

Immediately after losing this motion they appealed it to a higher court. That court denied their second motion to intervene. From the court, "The trial court acted well within its discretion in denying the motion to intervene as untimely. Manifestly, there was no miscarriage of justice in denying appellants' ex parte application, made after entry of judgment, to hijack this lawsuit so as to reroute it into a controversy over issues the actual parties never had any interest in litigating."

What's interesting here is that the City did not even want Nathan Winograd to intervene on their behalf. As per court documents "The City contends that intervention at this point could impose additional litigation costs and further delay implementation of a City feral cat management program and the lifting of the injunction." By filing the motion to intervene Nathan knowingly delayed the implementation of a TNR program. How many cats may have died because of his actions?

Not only did the motion to intervene have no merit but it was not filed in a proper manner. The court noted that lead attorney Orly Degani never moved to vacate the judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 663. The court stated that the cases which Degani cited to support her motion had nothing to do with a motion to vacate judgment.

Keep in mind that Nathan Winograd is not only a "nokill guru" but also an attorney who was licensed to practice in California. He can't claim legal ignorance in this matter. Winograd et al. did not file in a timely or proper manner. They tried to argue TNR when the real issue was the ability to intervene. I'm starting to think that Winograd used this lawsuit as a soapbox for himself to try to sell copies of his book or to raise donations. I see no other reason why an intelligent sane individual would file a doomed legal motion.

I've been told that Orly Degani is an intelligent and experienced lawyer. I find it hard to believe she would sign on to a case doomed to failure based on its merits. I also find it hard to believe she could have made such a big mistake as not filing properly. I've been told she is a true cat lover who generally tears up while talking about her cats. Witnesses at the last court hearing stated that steam was coming out of Orly's ears and she was visibly flustered. Perhaps Degani was too emotionally close to the issue to act competently.

Now that Winograd has lost twice, will he file again? The result will not be different. Doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Let's see how Nathan defines himself.